BERTLEY S. PILGRIM, ETC., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
COBB, Judge.
This case has appeared on appeal twice before. See Pilgrim v. State, 499 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986), and Pilgrim v. State, 480 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). At the time of our last review in 1986, the trial court had imposed a sentence in one case (Circuit Court No. 83-1092, robbery with a weapon) of seven years’ incarceration. After remand, this sentence was increased by adding twenty-three years of probation to follow the seven years. The record reveals no indication of conduct on the part of the defendant occurring after the original sentencing that would warrant an increase in sentence after appeal. See North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 89 S.Ct. 2072, 23 L.Ed.2d 656 (1969); Denholm v. State, 477 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985).
Consequently, we strike the probationary portion of the sentence in Case No. 83-1092.
REVERSED IN PART.
DAUKSCH and COWART, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wood v. State, 582 So. 2d 751 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)…tate supervision than on the original sentence. Also, it should be noted that if the trial court had merely added 10 years probation to the original 15-year sentence on count I, the trial court may have run afoul of our holding in Pilgrim v. State, 516 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). However, Pilgrim involved resentencing on a single charge in one case after two prior sentences in that case were vacated in two prior separate appeals. I agree, however, with the majority’s conclusion that the trial court’s re…
-
Lenthius Daryl Thomas v. State, 633 So. 2d 1122 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)…the cause remanded for correction of the sentences. The defendant asserts this cannot be done because he has begun to serve his sentences and such sentences cannot now be increased, citing Troupe v. Rowe, 283 So. 2d 857 (Fla.1973); Pilgrim v. State, 516 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); and Pelfrey v. State, 409 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). However, the sentences here will not be increased on remand; instead the trial court will be given an opportunity to correct an obvious clerical error. See Drumwright v.…
-
Frazier v. State, 540 So. 2d 228 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…his total period of probation from thirty years to thirty-five years, violated his right to due process as set forth in North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 89 S.Ct. 2072, 23 L.Ed.2d 656 (1969) and as recognized by this court in Pilgrim v. State, 516 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987) and Denholm v. State, 477 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). Contrary to the assertion of the defendant, the ruling in North Carolina v. Pearce is not implicated in the instant case because the trial court, in resentencing the defend…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711 (U.S. 1969)
- Bertley S. Pilgrim v. State, 480 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- Bertley S. Pilgrim v. State, 499 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)
- Denholm v. State, 477 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)